Posted on 08/17/2018 8:40:24 AM PDT by wardaddy
Speaking of fantasies, I haven't *ever* seen you *demolish* anything on one of the Religion Forum threads.
Total and unadulterated nonsense.
The EO and Rome have been in schism with each other for over 1,000 years,each claiming to be the original church founded by Jesus.
They differ on major points of doctrine, which by Roman standards effectively damns them.
Don't give us that *in communion* garbage.
These differences are so important that there has been no reconciliation in nearly a thousand years after the split. The Eastern Orthodox differ with Roman Catholicism on these issues:
The Holy Spirit (the filioque)
In EO - The third person of the Trinity, proceeding from the Father alone as in the original Nicene Creed. The Father sends the Spirit at the intercession of the Son. The Son is therefore an agent only in the procession of the Spirit.
In RC - 'When the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, He is not separated from the Father, He is not separated from the Son'.
Mary - Assumption and Immaculate conception of
EO - The Assumption is accepted and it is agreed that Mary experienced physical death, but the Immaculate conception is rejected. Orthodox belief is that the guilt of original sin is not transmitted from one generation to the next, thus obviating the need for Mary to be sinless.
RC - Both are dogmas of the church. The church has not as yet decided whether Mary actually experienced Physical death. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception states that Mary, was at conception 'preserved immaculate from all stain of original sin' and should not be confused with the virgin birth.
Pope - Authority of
EO - As the Bishop of Rome, he has a primacy of honour when Orthodox, not of jurisdiction. At present, his primacy is not effective as the papacy needs to be reformed in accordance with Orthodoxy. His authority is thus no greater or lesser than any of his fellow Bishops in the church.
RC - The Pope is the 'Vicar of Christ' i.e. the visible head of the church on earth and spiritual successor of St. Peter. He has supreme authority (including that over church councils) within Christendom (The Power of the keys).
Pope - Infallibility of
EO - Papal Infallibility is rejected. The Holy Spirit acts to guide the church into truth through (for example) ecumenical councils. This Orthodoxy recognises the first seven ecumenical councils (325-787) as being infallible.
RC - The Pope is infallible when, through the Holy Spirit, he defines a doctrine on faith and morals that is to be held by the whole church. This is a dogma and is therefore a required belief within Catholicism.
Purgatory
EO - An intermediate state between earth and heaven is recognised, but cleansing and purification occur in this life, not the next.
RC - A place of cleansing and preparation for heaven. Also a place where the punishment due to unremitted venial sins may be expiated.
I'd say these were the "biggies", but other differences also exist. These are explained here.
From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us.
1 Corinthians 3:16-17 Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you? If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him. For God's temple is holy and you are that temple.
1 Corinthians 6:19-20 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.
1 Corinthians 12:27 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.
I wonder which Christ we are talking about here? There is the Christ of the Bible, and there is the Christ of the cults, but they are not the same.
In the Church of Mark17, you are free to tell people what to do.
Let me see if I can expound on that. In the Church of Mark17, with a few minor variations, we believe we can interpret scripture, as the Holy Spirit leads us. Some might call that YOPIOS. We are our own popes. We don’t ask sinful priests to forgive our sins. We ask God to do that, directly.
Where we are not allowed any variation at all, is how we go to Heaven, and avoid Hell. In the Church of Mark17, we believe we get to Heaven, by being born anew, from above, through FAITH ALONE, and we have total, complete assurance, and confidence, that we will go to Heaven. I don’t know if you have that same confidence, and if you don’t, well, all I can say is, you could if you wanted to. Right now, I am not going to define what true FAITH is, but this is what puzzles me. You claim to be a Christian. I claim to be a Christian, yet our views are about as different as night and day. I fear that one of us will be standing tall at the great white throne. I am thinking, if won’t be me. 😁👍
I know, I know, this is off topic, but I am into off topic subjects. 😇
Ouch. That’s going to leave a scar bro. 😅
Bump
If I rape a boy in the back seat of my car, I get caught, arrested, tried, and sent to jail.
Why is that not the same with these guys? My employer would not get involved in an investigation and “judge” whether or not it worth going to the police.
They are people. They are NOT special. Why do they feel as though they are?
It is nice for you and others to post your ecclesiological fantasies, and maybe one day I will find time to demolish them, on an appropriate thread.
***
Why not now?
If it’s so easy to ‘demolish’ our ‘fantasies’ you should be able to find the time easily.
So how about we go back to the beginning and ask what the foundation of our faith and what we believe should be? That should be a good start to resolve this problem.
My four friends I’m pinging and I all believe that Jesus is the rock of our salvation, and that the teaching of the Apostles—which is the teaching of Jesus himself—should be what we base our faith on.
Do you believe differently?
They are people. They are NOT special. Why do they feel as though they are?
***
Because accusations can be made falsely, and they HAVE been. And good men have been driven out of the ministry before by accusations that had been proven false, but the damage had already been done and they never returned.
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? (1 Peter 4:17)
And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the writer’s inkhorn by his side; And the Lord said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof . And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house. (Ezekiel 9:3-6)
We have in the writings from ancient pious "fathers" evidence of an accretion of errors, of traditions of men which are not manifest in the the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (including how they understood the OT and gospels), while today both doctrinal and moral errors are widespread.
So, back to the remnant. Who the remnant are is God’s domain. If we are part of the remnant, what is the proper response?
The remnant are those who "sigh and that cry for all the abominations" seen in the church and the world, and use the sword of the Spirit against such, but who begin with themselves and seek to practically to be what they positionally are by faith in the Lord Jesus to save by His sinless shed blood. I have a long ways to go in all that.
I have often wondered what the individual responses were when the Prophet stood up and said, “you are going to be captured and carried away.”
But call to remembrance the former days, in which, after ye were illuminated, ye endured a great fight of afflictions; Partly, whilst ye were made a gazingstock both by reproaches and afflictions; and partly, whilst ye became companions of them that were so used. For ye had compassion of me in my bonds, and took joyfully the spoiling of your goods, knowing in yourselves that ye have in heaven a better and an enduring substance. Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompence of reward. For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise. For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul. (Hebrews 10:32-39)
Meanwhile, although both Catholic and Bible Christians engage in personal interpretations (Catholics ascertain the validation of church teaching based upon their judgment of whether it conforms with ancient Catholic teaching, while we are to do so based upon whether it conforms with the most ancient church teaching - the Scriptures), yet this does not replace the teaching office of church leadership.
The question is, in which church will a Ted Kennedy-type soul feel most at home and be treated as member: the church of Rome or a conservative evangelical church?
Which pastors are more likely to affirm traditional morals and our commonly held Truths?
Is it up to your employer to do the job of the police?
I honestly cannot believe that you would put these people in charge of a criminal case.
A predatory homo-rapist should be in jail, should they not?
If the cases were not “true” why is the church going broke paying these “children” to keep their mouths shut?
I think we’re arguing on very different wavelengths here.
If a crime WAS committed, it’s definitely the job of the police to deal with it,
But we need to keep in mind that there have been victims of false accusations as well.
I simply have to disagree with you.
The church should direct any complaints to the authorities. If it is a false claim, the police will ferret that out pretty quickly—if the complainant even goes to the police.
I think there is an assumption among the devout that this is some conspiracy against THEM and their faith. It is not. There are a lot of people on FR that WANT to believe that this is false and that these priests are no worse than any other “population.”
That kind of thinking is delusional.
In my opinion, the best solution is to come out and say that the church will no longer entertain claims without a valid police report. They should also say that they will cooperate fully with the police. They should not pay claims that are outside the statute of limitations as those people have had plenty of time to come forward.
Direct statements that acknowledge the sin, and take steps to mitigate future damage—at the same time declaring an end to the “settlements” that have not come as the result of a conviction would go a long way to regaining public trust.
The pussy-footing around that the church is doing is simply not effective and not helping their message at all.
I suspect that Romans, simply asserting platitudes, see that as “demolishing” an argument.
This same asserter stated Rome isn’t bound by Scripture.
They assert lots of things.
It comes as regularly as cow gas in a field of clover.
Where’s the beef?!
Well, we can both agree that the current way they’re dealing with it isn’t working at ALL.
The Church produced the Holy Inerrant Scripture from Hebrew sources and the apostles’ writing.
The Church received the deposit of faith and the doctrines from Christ and His apostles, and is authorized to develop them by the same. The Church does not receive the authorization from the Holy Scripture from the Holy Inerrant Scripture.
If you have further questions, ask.
If there is a question for me, please ask.
I think, I explained the position of the Church in full to you. If you have another question, ask.
These are not contradictory doctrines.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.